From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754919AbcDFPQ0 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:16:26 -0400
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:54251 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754085AbcDFPOH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 6 Apr 2016 11:14:07 -0400
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 12:14:01 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, jolsa@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        mingo@kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/11] perf, tools, stat: Add extra output of counter
 values with -v
Message-ID: <20160406151401.GE5945@kernel.org>
References: <1459802514-31501-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org>
 <1459802514-31501-12-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org>
 <20160406143220.GD5945@kernel.org>
 <20160406151008.GA9407@two.firstfloor.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160406151008.GA9407@two.firstfloor.org>
X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Em Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 08:10:08AM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 11:32:20AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 01:41:54PM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> > > From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Add debug output of raw counter values per CPU when
> > > perf stat -v is specified, together with their cpu numbers.
> > > This is very useful to debug problems with per core counters,
> > > where we can normally only see aggregated values.
> > 
> > Can we do it only when per CPU is in place?
> 
> Even then it is useful because the output is aggregated,
> so we don't know which CPU reported what.
> 
> Can perhaps increase the verbose threshold and only
> print it for -vv or -vvv ?

Yeah, that would be better, this way people will not get two identical
lines for a common usecase when using -v.

- Arnaldo